Another Ruby Ridge on the Horizon?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Feds have backed down!

http://www.ijreview....s-feds-leaving/

The modern Republican Party has deadbeats for heroes.

Now your argument loses credibility as your political bias enters the discussion.

My argument stands on it's merits. You fool yourself into believing being a contrarian to all sides somehow proves you have a superior thought process and are able to stand in judgment of everyone to which you can assign a partisan label. Your argument started without credibility so you have nothing to lose.

What a genius you must be. Your background and credentials in psychology must be incredible. Every time you run out of facts or even opinions, you fall back on trying to tell me how I think and feel. You are worse than the the right wing zealots who hurl insults. No one should be so in love with their ideology that they refuse to see the truth or recognize the human element.

I ran out of neither. I made sound arguments you failed to refute. Then without addressing the credibility of my actual argument you just declared it had lost credibility because I commented on the partisan mindset that justifies lawlessness. What an incredible hypocrite you are. Interesting that I was thinking how your insufferable platitudes make you more annoying than the right wing zealots. BTW, I have no idea how you feel, just how you act.

You have yet to make any sound argument. So far, you have suggested that spending $3 million to collect $300,000 was logical. You have suggested that this man who has lived 48 of his 68 years one way as a productive,law abiding citizen (and because of some bureaucratic decision) has suddenly became a "deadbeat". You have made irrelevant political statements. You have pretended to explain to me how I think. Worse than all of those though, you hang your hat on the "rule of law" and refuse to recognize that some laws are passed with either little regard to the human beings beings affected or, to benefit some people while damaging others. Your argument is shallow and obviously based on making some sort of partisan political statement.

Oh, and, you want to tell me that I am contrary to everything even though that is theoretically impossible. Just like the right wing zealots, you need to wise up and realize that neither the ideology of the right nor the left is always correct or, always faulty.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

Feds have backed down!

http://www.ijreview....s-feds-leaving/

The modern Republican Party has deadbeats for heroes.

Now your argument loses credibility as your political bias enters the discussion.

My argument stands on it's merits. You fool yourself into believing being a contrarian to all sides somehow proves you have a superior thought process and are able to stand in judgment of everyone to which you can assign a partisan label. Your argument started without credibility so you have nothing to lose.

What a genius you must be. Your background and credentials in psychology must be incredible. Every time you run out of facts or even opinions, you fall back on trying to tell me how I think and feel. You are worse than the the right wing zealots who hurl insults. No one should be so in love with their ideology that they refuse to see the truth or recognize the human element.

I ran out of neither. I made sound arguments you failed to refute. Then without addressing the credibility of my actual argument you just declared it had lost credibility because I commented on the partisan mindset that justifies lawlessness. What an incredible hypocrite you are. Interesting that I was thinking how your insufferable platitudes make you more annoying than the right wing zealots. BTW, I have no idea how you feel, just how you act.

You have yet to make any sound argument. So far, you have suggested that spending $3 million to collect $300,000 was logical. You have suggested that this man who has lived 48 of his 68 years one way as a productive,law abiding citizen (and because of some bureaucratic decision) has suddenly became a "deadbeat". You have made irrelevant political statements. You have pretended to explain to me how I think. Worse than all of those though, you hang your hat on the "rule of law" and refuse to recognize that some laws are passed with either little regard to the human beings beings affected or, to benefit some people while damaging others. Your argument is shallow and obviously based on making some sort of partisan political statement.

I have found you incapable of following or understanding sound arguments. If you belief that everything comes down to money, then we should never enforce anything that costs more than it recoups. Of course, that is only "logical" if everything comes down to money, which appears to be your premise.

He started being a deadbeat when HE stopped paying the fee he owed. As I stated for anyone with a functioning brain stem, if he wanted to protest the "bureaucratic decision" he could have kept paying the amount he was already paying, but refuse to cut the number of cattle down to 150-- that was the change, not the fee. That would be the logical protest. And had he done that, I would at least be able to think he was taking a position based on principle, whether I agreed with the decision or not.

You didn't respond to my actual argument because you had no coherent response, as you have proven. Instead, you started down the road of making it personal and then whined when I called you on it.

Beyond my original arguments is an observation based on simple logic that most of the those singing this guys praises as a hero are Republican. And a federal court has ruled the guy is refusing to pay what he legally owes, which by definition, makes him a deadbeat. Your most frequent refrain is an ad nauseum whine about partisanship impeding objectivity. Well, that's exactly what I see by those singing this guy's praises. And there can be a distinction between those who might chose to critique the federal government's approach to this and those that see this guy as acting heroically.

[Weegle777 78]

So Texas Tiger, you would say that people who refuse to pay fees or taxes are deadbeats?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Feds have backed down!

http://www.ijreview....s-feds-leaving/

The modern Republican Party has deadbeats for heroes.

Now your argument loses credibility as your political bias enters the discussion.

My argument stands on it's merits. You fool yourself into believing being a contrarian to all sides somehow proves you have a superior thought process and are able to stand in judgment of everyone to which you can assign a partisan label. Your argument started without credibility so you have nothing to lose.

What a genius you must be. Your background and credentials in psychology must be incredible. Every time you run out of facts or even opinions, you fall back on trying to tell me how I think and feel. You are worse than the the right wing zealots who hurl insults. No one should be so in love with their ideology that they refuse to see the truth or recognize the human element.

I ran out of neither. I made sound arguments you failed to refute. Then without addressing the credibility of my actual argument you just declared it had lost credibility because I commented on the partisan mindset that justifies lawlessness. What an incredible hypocrite you are. Interesting that I was thinking how your insufferable platitudes make you more annoying than the right wing zealots. BTW, I have no idea how you feel, just how you act.

You have yet to make any sound argument. So far, you have suggested that spending $3 million to collect $300,000 was logical. You have suggested that this man who has lived 48 of his 68 years one way as a productive,law abiding citizen (and because of some bureaucratic decision) has suddenly became a "deadbeat". You have made irrelevant political statements. You have pretended to explain to me how I think. Worse than all of those though, you hang your hat on the "rule of law" and refuse to recognize that some laws are passed with either little regard to the human beings beings affected or, to benefit some people while damaging others. Your argument is shallow and obviously based on making some sort of partisan political statement.

I have found you incapable of following or understanding sound arguments. If you belief that everything comes down to money, then we should never enforce anything that costs more than it recoups. Of course, that is only "logical" if everything comes down to money, which appears to be your premise.

He started being a deadbeat when HE stopped paying the fee he owed. As I stated for anyone with a functioning brain stem, if he wanted to protest the "bureaucratic decision" he could have kept paying the amount he was already paying, but refuse to cut the number of cattle down to 150-- that was the change, not the fee. That would be the logical protest. And had he done that, I would at least be able to think he was taking a position based on principle, whether I agreed with the decision or not.

You didn't respond to my actual argument because you had no coherent response, as you have proven. Instead, you started down the road of making it personal and then whined when I called you on it.

Beyond my original arguments is an observation that most of the those singing this guys praises as a hero are Republican. And a federal court has ruled the guy is refusing to pay what he legally owes, which by definition, makes him a deadbeat. Your most frequent refrain is an ad nauseum whine about partisanship impeding objectivity. Well, that's exactly what I see by those singing this guy's praises. And there can be a distinction between those who might chose to critique the federal government's approach to this and those that see this guy as acting heroically.

I understand your argument. I believe that it is narrow and biased. I believe that you see the government's side and, are lacking in consideration for the side of this individual. Do you understand? Do you understand why?

I will readily admit that I have a hard time considering him to be a deadbeat just because a bureaucratic agency suddenly changed policy, 48 years into this man's life.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

Feds have backed down!

http://www.ijreview....s-feds-leaving/

The modern Republican Party has deadbeats for heroes.

Now your argument loses credibility as your political bias enters the discussion.

My argument stands on it's merits. You fool yourself into believing being a contrarian to all sides somehow proves you have a superior thought process and are able to stand in judgment of everyone to which you can assign a partisan label. Your argument started without credibility so you have nothing to lose.

What a genius you must be. Your background and credentials in psychology must be incredible. Every time you run out of facts or even opinions, you fall back on trying to tell me how I think and feel. You are worse than the the right wing zealots who hurl insults. No one should be so in love with their ideology that they refuse to see the truth or recognize the human element.

I ran out of neither. I made sound arguments you failed to refute. Then without addressing the credibility of my actual argument you just declared it had lost credibility because I commented on the partisan mindset that justifies lawlessness. What an incredible hypocrite you are. Interesting that I was thinking how your insufferable platitudes make you more annoying than the right wing zealots. BTW, I have no idea how you feel, just how you act.

You have yet to make any sound argument. So far, you have suggested that spending $3 million to collect $300,000 was logical. You have suggested that this man who has lived 48 of his 68 years one way as a productive,law abiding citizen (and because of some bureaucratic decision) has suddenly became a "deadbeat". You have made irrelevant political statements. You have pretended to explain to me how I think. Worse than all of those though, you hang your hat on the "rule of law" and refuse to recognize that some laws are passed with either little regard to the human beings beings affected or, to benefit some people while damaging others. Your argument is shallow and obviously based on making some sort of partisan political statement.

I have found you incapable of following or understanding sound arguments. If you belief that everything comes down to money, then we should never enforce anything that costs more than it recoups. Of course, that is only "logical" if everything comes down to money, which appears to be your premise.

He started being a deadbeat when HE stopped paying the fee he owed. As I stated for anyone with a functioning brain stem, if he wanted to protest the "bureaucratic decision" he could have kept paying the amount he was already paying, but refuse to cut the number of cattle down to 150-- that was the change, not the fee. That would be the logical protest. And had he done that, I would at least be able to think he was taking a position based on principle, whether I agreed with the decision or not.

You didn't respond to my actual argument because you had no coherent response, as you have proven. Instead, you started down the road of making it personal and then whined when I called you on it.

Beyond my original arguments is an observation that most of the those singing this guys praises as a hero are Republican. And a federal court has ruled the guy is refusing to pay what he legally owes, which by definition, makes him a deadbeat. Your most frequent refrain is an ad nauseum whine about partisanship impeding objectivity. Well, that's exactly what I see by those singing this guy's praises. And there can be a distinction between those who might chose to critique the federal government's approach to this and those that see this guy as acting heroically.

I understand your argument. I believe that it is narrow and biased. I believe that you see the government's side and, are lacking in consideration for the side of this individual. Do you understand? Do you understand why?

I will readily admit that I have a hard time considering him to be a deadbeat just because a bureaucratic agency suddenly changed policy, 48 years into this man's life.

You apparently don't understand it. The policy that changed was not charging for grazing. It was the number of cattle he was allowed to graze. If he had simply ignored the change in policy and continued as he was doing before 1993, he would have kept grazing his 900 or so head of cattle AND kept paying the fee for all of them-- refusing to cut the number to 150. Instead, he just decided he was going to start paying nothing. That's what makes him a deadbeat.

But let's look at your assertion. If I'm taxed at 20% the first 48 years of my life and pay it, and then tax regulations change and I can no longer deduct certain expenses I was allowed to deduct for 48 years, what if I protest this change by deciding not to pay any taxes at all? Rules, laws, regulations, etc. change over the course of one's lifetime. Even if the change had been the creation of the grazing fee, that happens-- we can't have an array of rules for folks that stay in place for them over the course of their lifetime. Imagine having to grandfather every person for every regulation. One set of rules for you and another for me. Total customization of applicable rules. Insanity. Unmanageable. Unfair. But that is NOT what issue is here.

[Weegle777 78]

Well do ya?

[Elephant Tipper 430]

...cell towers have been turned off....

From your link: "UPDATE: Local reporters are using cell phones from the Bundy ranch."

I keep reading that Harry Reid is involved somehow. The comment seems like conjecture but is there any evidence of this idea ?

Doubt it. Probably people just throwing crap at the wall to see what will stick.

What you're saying is that the fed govt owns 80%+ of Nevada.

I hate repeating myself.

I went with the lead and the video which both stated that cell towers were cut off, although the video stated it was unconfirmed, without reading further. The need was not apparent given how the story was reported. Any updates should have been noted near the beginning. Not well written.

Reid and the new BLM chief, Neil Kornze, are very close friends. Kornze was Reid's senior policy advisor, 2003-2011. Kornze was confirmed as the new BLM chief just a few days ago. Kornze is from Nevada. Btw, Kornze is 35 years old. Reid's may be very deeply involved in this Bundy issue. Let time and the facts play out.

I quoted you inadvertently, meaning to quote BV. My heartfelt apologies for having quoted you. What's the matter ? Did the dog pee on your rugs this morning ? lol

To me, this Reid/Kornze relationship and the fact that this BLM action against Bundy occurred just days after Kornze's confirmation (4/8/14) raises many red flags for me. One concern that I read in multiple articles is that this issue may pertain to water rights. Regardless, the overall picture is that many cattlemen have been driven out of business in Nevada when livestock is in its greatest demand in history. Record beef prices with no end in sight. What I am understanding is that Bundy is the remaining cattleman in Clark County, NV.

Someone more cogent needs to speak on behalf of Bundy to the cameras. He and his son have trouble communicating clearly the background info.

Live cattle prices over the past 25 years......and it's skyrocketing:

http://www.barchart....=&txtDate=#jump

Reid/Kornze and water rights background info:

http://www.americant...ping_point.html

Kornze confirmation: http://www.washingto...s-blm-director/

Map which shows federal land ownership by state, yikes : http://strangemaps.f...ns_the_west.jpg

[AUDub 11,147]

What's the matter ? Did the dog pee on your rugs this morning ? lol

First things first, I think you're projecting. I'm in a great mood!

I went with the lead and the video which both stated that cell towers were cut off, although the video stated it was unconfirmed, without reading further. The need was not apparent given how the story was reported. Any updates should have been noted near the beginning. Not well written.

I concur. Not well written at all.

Reid and the new BLM chief, Neil Kornze, are very close friends. Kornze was Reid's senior policy advisor, 2003-2011. Kornze was confirmed as the new BLM chief just a few days ago. Kornze is from Nevada. Btw, Kornze is 35 years old. Reid's may be very deeply involved in this Bundy issue. Let time and the facts play out.

I concur with this, too.

To me, this Reid/Kornze relationship and the fact that this BLM action against Bundy occurred just days after Kornze's confirmation (4/8/14) raises many red flags for me. One concern that I read in multiple articles is that this issue may pertain to water rights....

Water rights, solar panels, fracking rights, oil rights, mineral rights, etc. etc. ad nauseum. There have been many variations of this story. The popular one right now is the solar panel issue if my reading of "Infowars" and "Before It's News" is any indicator. Throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks.

The other issue is one that TexasTiger has pointed out many times. This is by no means a new story.

1993 he was told to reduce his stock to 150 head and stop grazing his cattle in areas that had been designated refuge areas for a threatened species. In response, he stopped paying the fees for his lease entirely.

1998 he was told by the courts to stop grazing his cattle in an area for which he had no legal right to do so.

July of last year he was given an ultimatum to remove his cattle or they would be confiscated.

All of this took place before Kornze was nominated for current post.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

To me, this Reid/Kornze relationship and the fact that this BLM action against Bundy occurred just days after Kornze's confirmation (4/8/14) raises many red flags for me. One concern that I read in multiple articles is that this issue may pertain to water rights....

Water rights, solar panels, fracking rights, oil rights, mineral rights, etc. etc. ad nauseum. There have been many variations of this story. The popular one right now is the solar panel issue if my reading of "Infowars" and "Before It's News" is any indicator. Throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks.

The other issue is one that TexasTiger has pointed out many times. This is by no means a new story.

1993 he was told to reduce his stock to 150 head and stop grazing his cattle in areas that had been designated refuge areas for a threatened species. In response, he stopped paying the fees for his lease entirely.

1998 he was told by the courts to stop grazing his cattle in an area for which he had no legal right to do so.

July of last year he was given an ultimatum to remove his cattle or they would be confiscated.

All of this took place before Kornze was nominated for current post.

The problem with this event is that many Nevadans were apparently ready to go to the mat over whatever the issue is, so something more serious is playing out than just grazing rights and fines. This guy Kornze, who has only one year on the job in the BLM, rises to become the chief, then within 3 days of confirmation he makes a major decision to go to war with these people, almost Waco style (I know the thread is Ruby Ridge but this scenario is more like Waco to me). Bad decisions were made in the BLM. Someone higher up had to have read Kornze the riot act. It used to be an old story but it's a brand new one now after this fiasco style of law enforcement.

The Kornze/Reid relationship could have brought this issue to the forefront. Reid is pure politician and I am suspicious of his involvement.

The Bundy family needs a good spokesman to clearly present their issues to the public.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

Heard a guy on the news, can't remember his name, state that Bundy has paid his bill, or a portion...not sure which, BUT he made the checks out to Nevada, not the BLM, and they apparently have been cashed.

[AUDub 11,147]

Heard a guy on the news, can't remember his name, state that Bundy has paid his bill, or a portion...not sure which, BUT he made the checks out to Nevada, not the BLM, and they apparently have been cashed.

I need to find source I read earlier yesterday that stated he attempted to pay both the county and the state, but they both rejected his payments. I doubt the veracity of this claim.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

Heard a guy on the news, can't remember his name, state that Bundy has paid his bill, or a portion...not sure which, BUT he made the checks out to Nevada, not the BLM, and they apparently have been cashed.

I need to find source I read earlier yesterday that stated he attempted to pay both the county and the state, but they both rejected his payments. I doubt the veracity of this claim.

Even if true, it's meaningless. If I know I owe Tom but prefer to give money to Bob, my debt remains.

[homersapien 11,367]

Facts? We don't need no stinkin facts. We'll create our own.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

TT....good point. So if I owe the IRS but prefer to give my money to the Treasury to pay down the debt, the debt will jus continue to grow.Got it.

[Weegle777 78]

What scares me is that some people here would side with wealthy, elitist politicians that couldn't care less about your welfare, over your fellow citizens and brothers. This is akin to siding with the Brits over your fellow colonists because they refused to pay taxes to Britain. Were the colonists wrong for standing against the Brits?

[Elephant Tipper 430]

Heard a guy on the news, can't remember his name, state that Bundy has paid his bill, or a portion...not sure which, BUT he made the checks out to Nevada, not the BLM, and they apparently have been cashed.

I need to find source I read earlier yesterday that stated he attempted to pay both the county and the state, but they both rejected his payments. I doubt the veracity of this claim.

Even if true, it's meaningless. If I know I owe Tom but prefer to give money to Bob, my debt remains.

May be an over simplification, may not. The glaring issue to me is that supposedly Bundy is the last cattleman in the county. All others apparently have been driven out by the BLM. Why ? For a tortoise ? For the cost of land grazing fees ? For greedy businessmen/politicians ? Neither the BLM or the Bundy family have clearly presented their argument to the public other than the courts have mandated and sometimes the feds make very bad mistakes....like yesterday, until cooler heads prevailed. The ranchers were willing to fight for their convictions. Rarely do we see ranchers and the feds interface like this or are there other similar situations ? Don't think so.

Need more info.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

This is how the BLM bureaucrats view your 1st amendment right. You're free to talk but only over there.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

The taxpayer is getting hosed on this BLM deal too. "A roundup contract totals $966,000." If the figure of 100 personnel required to fulfill this effort is accurate, then that puts the average cost per person at around $10,000, which is obscene.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2601140/Standoff-desert-Last-rancher-south-Nevada-takes-200-armed-federal-agents-SNIPERS-trying-confiscate-cattle-ancestral-land-constitutional-dispute-rare-tortoise.html

[japantiger 4,051]

What I never understood about this was why the Feds thought they needed snipers and armed confrontation in the first place. I never saw anyone inciting violence but, the Fed.

[Weegle777 78]

Funny how I have asked the same question twice, and no one will touch it.

[autigeremt 6,599]

What I never understood about this was why the Feds thought they needed snipers and armed confrontation in the first place. I never saw anyone inciting violence but, the Fed.

They were hoping for violence, which leads to seizure of the property by force.

[Weegle777 78]

Amazing how when citizens band together, the yappy mouse tucks tail and runs. Proof that we have more power than we think we have.

[AUDub 11,147]

What I never understood about this was why the Feds thought they needed snipers and armed confrontation in the first place. I never saw anyone inciting violence but, the Fed.

This makes me wonder if you've kept up with the story at all. Read Mr. Bundy's quotes in the time leading up to all this.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

Amazing how when citizens band together, the yappy mouse tucks tail and runs. Proof that we have more power than we think we have.

Look at the vegetation in those photos-- does that look like a place that easily supports cattle?

[homersapien 11,367]

What scares me is that some people here would side with wealthy, elitist politicians that couldn't care less about your welfare, over your fellow citizens and brothers. This is akin to siding with the Brits over your fellow colonists because they refused to pay taxes to Britain. Were the colonists wrong for standing against the Brits?

What scares me it the apparent lack of respect for the rule of law in our country.

Guy is using Federal land for grazing his cattle, for which he has been paying a fee. Now he decides he doesn't want to deal with the federal government and essentially stops payment for said use.

How is that a deliberate scofflaw becomes the hero? Is a poacher a hero because they decide not to purchase a hunting license? I don't like paying taxes, but if I get in trouble for refusing to pay them=, I am not going to claim the role of victim.

How would you feel about this if he suddenly decided not to pay on a debt or contract owed to a private company instead of the government?

I don't get the logic being used to defend this guy. This is just more political Kabuki theater IMO.